NO on 2055 - same objection as others (already raised) Regarding 1858, I have 2 concerns: 1) I also feel the interpretation of "this" is changed, but following slightly different interpretation. The current LRM states that the lookup starts in the randomize class OBJECT, (not the in context of the randomize method). The name "this" is valid in the context of a non-static method (like a hidden parameter), it is not a property of the class object. So "this" would not be found in the scope of the class object - thus it should be resolved in the scope in which the randomize call occurred. 2) I'd also expect to be able to apply the local:: prefix to a hierarchical name. For example, "local::x.a" - where 'x' is a local struct containing a member 'a'. The current text seems to only allow "local::" as a prefix for an "identfier". Otherwise I agree with the intent of both proposals. I prefer Gord's text for specifying the default name resolution (in the absense of the identifier list). YES on the rest. - Ray > -----Original Message----- > From: Mehdi Mohtashemi [mailto:Mehdi.Mohtashemi@synopsys.com] > Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2007 2:32 PM > To: Arturo Salz; Clifford E. Cummings; Rich, Dave; Francoise > Martinolle; Neil.Korpusik@Sun.COM; Ryan, Ray; Vreugdenhil, > Gordon; Steven Sharp; stuart@sutherland-hdl.com; Heath > Chambers; mills@lcdm-eng.com; Mark Hartoog; Mike Mintz; > Scott, David; Michael Burns > Cc: sv-ec@eda.org; Jonathan Bromley; Geoffrey.Coram > Subject: RE: [sv-ec]E-mail Vote: Closes 12am PST December 15 > 2007, and Minutes of Dec3,10 on the web, > > Reminder, midnight Friday December 14 is deadline for the > ballot below. Also, minutes of Dec3 and Dec 10 meetings are on the > the web, www.eda.org/sv-ec/Minutes.html > > - Mehdi > -----Original Message----- > From: Mehdi Mohtashemi > Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2007 4:03 PM > To: Arturo Salz; 'Clifford E. Cummings'; 'Rich, Dave'; > 'Francoise Martinolle'; 'Neil.Korpusik@Sun.COM'; 'Ryan, Ray'; > 'Gordon Vreugdenhil'; 'Steven Sharp'; > 'stuart@sutherland-hdl.com'; 'Heath Chambers'; > 'mills@lcdm-eng.com'; Mark Hartoog; 'Mike Mintz'; 'David > Scott'; 'Michael Burns' > Cc: 'sv-ec@eda.org'; 'Jonathan Bromley'; 'Geoffrey.Coram' > Subject: RE: [sv-ec]E-mail Vote: Closes 12am PST December 15 2007 > > [Modification to the email ballot: > Removed: (mistakenly placed in the email ballot) > a) 1809: mistakenly placed, sv-bc issue > b) original proposal file name for 1858 > 1858-randomize-constraint-resolution.htm > > Added: replaced 1809 with mantis 974 (CLOSE) > > Please use the following list to cast your vote by midnight > Friday December 14 2007. > It would be great to have voting done by that day, so that > given an extension from p1800 working group we can resolve > other issues on Monday December 17th meeting. > - Mehdi > > -------------------------------------------------- > > We are conducting an email vote based on December 10 2007 > sv-ec meeting. > The time period for this ballot is 3 days, the voting closes > on December > 15 2007, 12 am. Please send your vote no later than Friday December 14 > 2007 11:59pm PST] Please read guidelines and instructions for > each mantis item listed since there may vary depending on the > mantis item. A few mantis items may have multiple proposals, > you should vote for each proposal with YES/NO vote. > > Individual eligible members' email is used in TO list since > there maybe a delay with sv-ec email reflector. Other regular > attendees as well as sv-ec alias are listed in the CC part. > At the moment the reflector site does not come up. > > The following mantis items are listed for voting: > section a) Mantis set related to queue manipulation, > covered by 1702 > (Note 1702 was approved on December 10 2007) to be closed. > 412, 516, 517, 518, 519, 520, 521, 522, 801, 974 > > section b) > 958, 1447, > 1858 [contains two proposals] > 2055, 2137, 2181 2227 > > Operating guidelines for sv-ec email vote: > - Only 3 days to respond (Midnight Friday December 14th 2007) > - An issue and its proposal passes if there are zero ** NO ** votes > and at least half of the eligible voters respond with a YES vote. > - Any NO vote must be accompanied by a reason. > This issue will then be up for discussion at the next > conference call. > - If there are more than one proposal indicated per mantis > item, please cast your vote for each and every proposal. > - Please indicate any friendly amendment that you think will change > your vote to a YES, this will help with completing our task. > > As of the December 10 2007 meeting, the eligible voters are > (total 15): > > Arturo Salz, > Cliff Cummings > Dave Rich > Francoise Martinolle > Neil Korpusik > Ray Ryan > Gordon Vreugdenhil > Steven Sharp > Stu Sutherland > Heath Chambers > Don Mills > Mark Hartoog > Mike Mintz > David Scott > Mike Burns > > > Please mark your vote below by an x. If No, then specify a reason. > Send it to the reflector. > 412, 516, 517, 518, 519, 520, 521, 522, 801, 974 > > Section a) > CLOSE following mantis items, covered by 1702 > 412 ___ Yes ___ No > http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=000412 > > 516 ___ Yes ___ No > http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=000516 > > 517 ___ Yes ___ No > http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=000517 > > 518 ___ Yes ___ No > http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=000518 > > 518 ___ Yes ___ No > http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=000519 > > 520 ___ Yes ___ No > http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=000520 > > 521 ___ Yes ___ No > http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=000521 > > 522 ___ Yes ___ No > http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=000522 > > 801 ___ Yes ___ No > http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=000801 > > 974 ___ Yes ___ No > http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=000974 > > > Section b) > 958, 1447, > 1858 [contains two proposals: > 1858-randomize_with_syntax.htm] > 1858_local.pdf > 2055, 2137, 2181 2227 > > > 958 ___ Yes ___ No > http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=000958 > > 1447 ___ Yes ___ No > http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0001447 > > 1858 [Multiple proposal files] > 1858-randomize_with_syntax.htm ___ Yes ___ No > 1858_local.pdf ___ Yes ___ No > http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0001858 > > 2055 ___ Yes ___ No > http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0002055 > > 2137 ___ Yes ___ No > http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0002137 > > 2181 ___ Yes ___ No > http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0002181 > > 2227 ___ Yes ___ No > http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0002227 > > > > section a) > 412 5.14.1 Queue operator examples use aggregate > constructors incorrectly > 522 use of concatenation in 5.14.2 (Francoise) > 521 pattern assignment for queues (Francoise) > 520 example of queues assignment (Francoise) > 519 section 5.14,empty array literal syntax (Francoise) > 518 queues and arrays (Francoise) > 517 concatenation syntax usage section 5.14 (Francoise) > 516 5.7 and 5.8 description of type compatible arrays > 801 Errors in assignment pattern in 5.4 example > 974 comparison of dynamic arrays/queues to 1-dimensional > fixed arrays > > section b) > 1858 Name binding in inline constraints > two separate proposals > 1447 Contradictory stmts about unsized array dimensions > (5.1 vs. 5.7 and 5.8) > 958 dynamic array size method unclear when empty > 2055 coverage bin distribution is not even > 2137 Some assertion contexts should be procedural > 2181 Ambiguity implicit declaration of production > variables in randsequence > -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.Received on Sat Dec 15 04:52:42 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Dec 15 2007 - 04:53:04 PST